View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Wed Apr 23, 2014 3:48 am



Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 
 In House Options 
Author Message
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pm
Posts: 5283
Location: Topsfield, MA
Post In House Options
Just curious to see what people think of some in house candidate who can maybe fill roles after spending the year/this offseason learning the offense completely.

Devlin replacing Moore at backup QB: can he manage a game?

Miller replacing Bush at HB - can he handle 15-20 carries? can he block?

Binns or Matthews replacing everyone who tried #3 WR - both apparently impressed in practice, can they combine with a #1 WR and Hartline to make the offense more dynamic?

Clay replacing Fasano at TE - does he finally know the playbook?

Martin replacing Long at LT - can he even bench more than me?

Jerry replacing Martin at RT - I've heard it mentioned, is he quick enough?

Odrick replacing Starks at DT - probably the one I'd be comfortable with

Patterson replacing Smith at CB - could he fit better in a zone defense?

Am I missing anyone?


Mon Jan 07, 2013 10:54 am
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor

Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:20 pm
Posts: 152
Location: Richmond VA
Post Re: In House Options
I know its easier said than done, but i think we shouldn't focus on ways to replace many of these key starters. Our team with these people was not good enough to make the playoffs, and they were "better" than many others that we had. I do not believe it was because of these individuals that we were not able to be successful. If we keep dropping those "good" players, we lose some talent and make it that much more difficult to improve the overall skill level on the team. It basically keeps us running in circles, instead of making actual improvements. I think it is important to upgrade the other positions and players who are not up to par while ideally keeping as many of these current free agents as possible.

Teams like the patriots can let key players go from time to time because they have so many impact players on both sides of the ball to begin with. Plus they can develop and plug in new players so effortlessly it seems. We unfortunately, don't have that luxury. I am aware we won't keep everyone, but the main priority should not be to find the cheaper option.

I know this probably isn't even the purpose of your post, so I don't want to sound like I'm arguing your point. But we have a good amount of cap room to do some things. Even though we don't want to spend in excess, we shouldn't be so frugal either. If we lose players like Hartline, Bush, and Smith we still have to sign someone to replace their production AND find others to put us over the hump and in position to make the playoffs. I think it should be a goal to keep most of these players AND add several players that can help us take that next step.


Mon Jan 07, 2013 11:51 pm
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pm
Posts: 5283
Location: Topsfield, MA
Post Re: In House Options
I hear ya, and I'm not suggesting drop everyone to just go in-house and cheap.

A comment Ross made about knowing your own better than others would suggest that its possible they will re-sign or promote from within. Sometimes it takes a year for young guys to learn all of the nuances of a new offense so it wouldn't surprise me if Miami has a plan to improve a little from within.

If you go all out free agency you become the Redskins 10 years ago. Not the right approach.

But I also agree that they can't just stick with what they have and add draft picks because what they have isn't elite.


Tue Jan 08, 2013 9:44 am
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:59 pm
Posts: 5047
Post Re: In House Options
All of those are possibilities, not necessarily desireable ones, but they are possibilities. Hopefully it won't come to that though. Hopefully Ireland addresses several of those needs through the draft and is able to successfully negotiate some team friendly deals with our veteran free agents. With five picks in the first 100 we stand a good chance to improve simply through the draft and re-signing/re-structuring our veterans contracts. While I know many are hoping for a big splash in free agency, I don't think it's necessarily a must.


Tue Jan 08, 2013 11:04 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 4 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MSNbot Media and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007, 2010 phpBB Group.
Designed by Coots & IamPZ - Phinfever.com.